/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12409275
Sounds about like the right requirements

>>12409285
Well the expected distance E(|X|) for this setup is iirc
sqrt(1000)=10·sqrt(10)=31.6..,
so they should have choosen a perfect square for the number of steps instead

Best physics textbooks to learn physics?

Notes on this questionable thread:

CH is a bad example to make the point, since that is merely independent of (some popular) set theory. There's more hands-on examples, e.g. about naturals.
Btw. I think Gödel thought (as a Platonist) c=|N_2|.

"True but unprovable" is a shitty formulation of Gödel as well.
What we can say is that assuming all the metalogical presumptions to do Peano arithmetic (or other systems with particular conditions on their axiomatic formulation), there's statement about naturals that neither have a finite proof, nor do their negation.

There's nice models that validate both statements (but of course an example is not a proof of the general case)

Okay now if you really want, you could adopt LEM in the meta-logic to make the case that one of the two undecidable statements is "true" but what does that mean or do?

As far as consistency is concerned, Gödels arithmetizised consistency statement is not the only way of framing Hilbert's quest and there's model logic proof as well as completely different proofs using ordinals, that respectively both say that Peano arithmetic is consistent. I.e. it would be a dare to be against the consistency.

>>11105701
For a meta-theorem, note that the following is independent of ZFC:
>"Given a set B with a bigger cardinality than a smaller set S, then the set B also has more subsets than S."

>Set theory in charge of capturing the notion of collection

>>10932408
maximus kekerinos

Do the quaternions over the rationals work?

Many people think that IQ research or more specifically it's findings tend to give a hand to "right-wingers" in their anti-immigration etc rhetoric.

But it is actually even more deeply rooted in left wing thought and financing. Let me give you an example. Now suddenly the teachers are not held accountable for anything and can just go "welp the reason many of you can't follow us is not just up to us he-he". Completely throwing the responsibility of the teachers themselves out the window, and giving more support for the existence of their corrupt and marxist unions, since the teaching efforts are now thought to be somewhat "in vain".

A lot of scientific research is financed by political motivation, why can't we say the same for "intelligence research". Now suddenly all "teachers" are immune from criticism, despite not doing their jobs correctly. That is why it may not seem like it at first, IQ is a hugely leftist metric and should be looked at skeptically.

If only the US became a more manly state again and banned unionizing, then suddenly calls to "IQ research" would diminish as the teachers would sweat to actually do their jobs and compete against one another.

FUCK THE UNIONS